Repent for the Kingdom
I: Choosing Justice
Genesis 2:15-17; Genesis 3:1-7; Psalm 32; Romans 5:12-19; Matthew 4
:1-11
The five weeks of Lent in Year A explore the concepts of sin,
salvation, and justification in Paul’s letter to the Romans (and a
diversion into pseudo-Paul’s Ephesians), and the long theological
discourses that John’s Jesus engages in. Tradition defines “sin”
in terms of conventional morality – especially sexual morality – and
petty trespass. “Justification” usually means “rationalization”
as in, “Anyone would be justified in demanding the death penalty in
these circumstances”; or “abortion can never be justified under any
circumstances.” Even though the root of the word is “justice,”
and the true meaning is “to be made just,” the usual understanding is
less about reconciling transformation and more about coercion and
retribution. Likewise “repentance,” as pointed out in the Ash
Wednesday meditation, has come to mean “feel sorry about” – i.e., cheap
guilt to accompany petty trespass – rather than “turning around and
away.” Real crime, such as murder, earns its own conventional
retribution, so doesn’t enter the discussion. Murderers and other
so-called “capital” criminals may indeed “repent” of their crimes, but
“justification” for them is impossible on the earthly side of death –
or so we have been taught for the past 2,000 years.
For the first Sunday in Lent, according to the orthodox interpretation
of the first reading from Genesis, the evil snake seduces the naive
woman who in turn traps the all-too-willing man into disobeying
God. In the last reading, the One who is to save humanity from
the consequences of that original sin is made a similar offer and
declines. In between is the Apostle Paul in one of his more
inscrutable arguments. But if we let go of tradition and listen
to scholarship, these readings take on a very different meaning that
can provide leadership into a true and lasting repentance for this
season of Lent and beyond. These stories are not about sex, nor
are they about conventional morality and petty trespass. They are
about human consciousness, and the choice each person has to make about
whether or not to participate in God’s ongoing program of distributive
justice-compassion.
Non-human inhabitants of the natural world don’t spend their time
agonizing over “the problem of evil.” So far as humans know, the
rabbit does not have a last regret as her neck is broken by the fox’s
jaws. Justice in God’s Realm is profoundly distributive. To
eat and be eaten is the Eucharistic law of the universe. But
thanks to the Trickster in God’s garden, humanity was given the ability
to make value judgments about whether the rabbit “deserved” to die, and
whether the fox’s action is “violent.” While what the snake told
Eve is true on the surface (“if you eat of the fruit of tree of
knowledge of good and evil you will not die”), in pure Trickster
reversal, that knowledge brings the kind of death that separates us
from God’s realm, where the lion and the lamb lie down together in
trust that the Universe provides for equal life in balance – the
radical fairness of distributive justice.
So into the fray of Paul’s tortured language (Romans 15-16): “But the
free gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died through
the one man’s trespass, much more surely have the grace of God and the
free gift in the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, abounded for the
many. And the free gift is not like the effect of the one man’s
sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought
condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brings
justification” (emphasis mine). The free gift (charis) is
the grace of God. One human (Adam/Eve) chose to live outside the
distributive justice of God’s realm (sin/trespass), thereby bringing
injustice to humanity because of the human demand for retribution
(payback) instead of the fair distribution of sustainable life.
But God’s distributive justice-compassion (righteousness) is freely
available in God’s realm – the natural world where there is no
“good-evil” dichotomy because all inhabitants of the Universe (God’s
realm – the natural world) live in a fair balance that sustains life
for all. That is the free gift of grace – distributive
justice-compassion – returned to humanity by Jesus, if humanity chooses
to accept and use it.
Where modern and traditional theology loses its way is in the
misunderstanding of death. Jesus did not come so that people
would no longer die, or so that people might die now but be brought
back to life later when Jesus comes back again to finish what he failed
to do the first time. Death is a fact of life – even (or
especially) in God’s realm. Every being in the Universe, from
eucharyotes to sabertoothed tigers to dwarf stars and planets has a
life cycle that continues so long as there is a sustaining niche for
it. As soon as the niche evolves away from sustainability, the
life form dies – whether it is animal, vegetable, mineral, or
gas. However, the good news from the scientific point of view
(and surprisingly from the Apostle Paul’s ecstatic mystical insight) is
that matter cannot be created or destroyed, it can only be
transformed. That continuing, eternal transformation is something
that humanity participates in, whether individuals choose to believe it
or not. That is God’s free gift of eternal life.
But what Jesus was talking about was not the natural order of the
evolution of the Universe. Jesus was talking about how humanity
can replicate the distributive justice-compassion found in God’s
realm. Back to Romans 5:17-19: “If, because of the one man’s
trespass, death exercised dominion through that one, much more surely
will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of
righteousness exercise dominion in life through the one man, Jesus
Christ. Therefore, just as one man’s trespass led to condemnation
for all, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to justification and
life for all. For just as by the one man’s disobedience the many
were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made
righteous.” Now Paul shifts to free gift as righteousness – as
being made just (justification). If humanity is to replicate
God’s distributive justice it can only be in this life here and now, as
radical fairness – consciously choosing radical abandonment of
self-interest (love) – as Jesus taught by the example of his own death
at the hands of Roman imperialism. Jesus taught that radical
abandonment of self-interest as the way to live in the kingdom of God
in this life. Whether Jesus or anyone lives in the kingdom of God
in another life before or after this one is irrelevant. The
non-human inhabitants of God’s realm do not have the need or the
ability to choose radical abandonment of self-interest. Only
humans on Planet Earth (so far as we know) have that ability and – more
of the Trickster’s irony – the need if humanity is to continue for much
longer as a conscious life form. The free gift of distributive
justice is there, all we have to do is accept it and live it.
Matthew’s story of the temptation of Jesus now begins to take on a
metaphor that has meaning in a post-modern, post-Christian world.
When the Devil (the same Trickster as appeared to Adam/Eve, the first
humans) appears to the One whom Christians consider to be sent as the
reconciler between God’s realm and humanity, the Trickster offers all
the ego-enhancing, self-serving powers and principalities of Empire,
with its glittering theology: piety, war, victory, and – here comes the
tricky part– uneasy, ephemeral, peace: i.e., retributive justice, which
is injustice, that brought about Jesus’s undeserved, unfair, unjust
death. Matthew’s Jesus says, “Get out of here, Satan!
Remember, it is written, “You are to pay homage to the Lord our God,
and you are to revere him alone.” Jesus chooses God’s realm,
which is justice and life here and now. He is able to do it
because of his extraordinary trust in God’s free gift.
We have the free gift (charis) of grace that brings justice and eternal
life because we are part of God’s realm, whether we know it, believe
it, or not. Jesus’s choice provides us with the way to begin the
process – the program – of conscious participation.