Jesus presents a problem to anarchists. He is harsh on business, easy on the state. But he continues God’s uninterest in kingship.
But wait, wait... Doesn’t the Catholic Church have a feast of “Christ the King?” You bet, started in 1925. Like, yesterday, in Church time.
“God and King” starts with 1 Samuel 8, which gets emphasized in 1 Samuel 12. It is an amazingly direct, clear, unambiguous lesson: God does not want us to have a king. And “no king” in Greek is An+ archy.
So far so good, God is on our side.
But that does not mean God does not want government, since God specifically gives Moses laws to live by, rules of personal conduct, in effect, government. Fear of God and love one another is government enough, as Jesus reiterated. There is much to study and learn from those laws, which sound horrid from the outside but are remarkably good in practice. (Talk of killing malefactors in law and action in practice are two different things.)
But against God’s advice, the Jews insisted on a king, and the Jews got a Kings, good and hard, just as God promised. AS God promised, when the king thing went bad, God would not hear the cries of the Jews. It got bad, Jews cried. Read Samuel forward. Eventually, Jeremiah and Daniel and others start prophesying a Messiah. Where did the idea the Messiah would be a king come from? Jewish aesthetical imperatives? Who knows?
The Messiah arrives. So is Jesus Christ the King? Pontius Pilate asked Jesus this question directly:
Matthew 27:12-14 12 And when he was accused of the chief priests and elders, he answered nothing.
13 Then said Pilate unto him, Hearest thou not how many things they witness against thee?
14 And he answered him to never a word; insomuch that the governor marvelled greatly.
So far, on this point, Jesus is not talking, according to Matthew.
John 18:33-37 33 Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews?
34 Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?
35 Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done?
36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.
The Dominicans have an argument strategy: seldom affirm, never deny, always differentiate. They may have learned it from Jesus. Jesus denies nothing. In this case he affirms nothing either, at least in regards to what Pilate asks. he does differntiate: His kingdom is not of this world. He says he came to be called king, so he could witness to the truth to the world that his “kingdom” is not of the world. So for all practical purposes, within the concerns of Pilate and Herod, Jesus is not a king.
And this from Mark 15
2 And Pilate asked him, Art thou the King of the Jews? And he answering said unto them, Thou sayest it.
3 And the chief priests accused him of many things: but he answered nothing.
4 And Pilate asked him again, saying, Answerest thou nothing? behold how many things they witness against thee.
5 But Jesus yet answered nothing; so that Pilate marvelled.
6 Now at that feast he released unto them one prisoner, whomsoever they desired.
7 And there was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection.
8 And the multitude crying aloud began to desire him to do as he had ever done unto them.
9 But Pilate answered them, saying, Will ye that I release unto you the King of the Jews?
10 For he knew that the chief priests had delivered him for envy.
11 But the chief priests moved the people, that he should rather release Barabbas unto them.
12 And Pilate answered and said again unto them, What will ye then that I shall do unto him whom ye call the King of the Jews?
Here after asking jesus if he is king, and getting no affirmation from Jesus, he goes to the Jews and asks what is to be done “unto him whom ye call the King of the Jews? It is clear to Pilate it is not Jesus who says he is king, it is the Jews.
As clear as it is in 1 Samuel 8, it is clear here Jesus will not accept being king on any human terms, and if he is a king at all (for to be king would be every bit as condescending as any other role for God) it is in heaven. So we come back full circle, the Jews are to depend on God, not a king. And as if to remind the Jews of their disasterous history with Kings, Pilate posts “Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews” on the cross. Scandalous!
But note overall, how Jesus deals with the kings, their representatives, the state. The Jews wanted Jesus to be a king, to lead a rebellion, and of course win. The rebellion part is what Pilate worried about. But Jesus did not rebel. Neither Pilate nor Herod had anything to worry about. Because as St Paul says, the powers that be are ordained by God. yes, they are wicked, but we all knew that before we insisted that God give us a king, a demand we renew every election. As Emma Goldman said, society gets the criminals it deserves, and I would observe, especially when we elect them. (Goldman also said if voting changed anything they’d make it illegal.)
Now let’s look a how Jesus treat business people. At the beginning and the end of his ministry, he violently clears the businesspeople from the Temple Precincts (at least once, probably twice http://www.teachingtheword.org/articles_view.asp?articleid=64842&columnid=5446).
Now they were just providing a service, exchanging money to pay the temple tax and selling livestock to people who would prefer to buy that for sacrifice at the last minute than haul someting all the way from Nazareth, let alone Syria.
Now it was not an issue with money exchanging or the temple tax, since Jesus himself paid the temple tax, and took care of Peter’s tax too. And it was not a problem with the sacrificing, it was a problem with the location. Business people had spread their markets into the temple precincts. They got beyond their proper place.
What a stark contrast! The state murders an innocent Jesus, and he submits. Some business people set up shop outside their proper place, and Jesus lays waste their operations. Why the difference?
Because the state is ordained by God, and its role is punishment. Business is natural and good, and needs curbing if it goes inappropriate.
So in summary, the state is there to punish us, in the measure we look to the state to “fight our battles” for us.
Business is a natural and good phenomenom, and is directly ruled by God, who He himself will punish if business steps out of line.
Taxes are part of the state apparatus, which even Jesus paid, but not without a miracle. So it is with us.
Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. said "Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society." But he would, wouldn’t he? And the IRS engraved it on their headquarters. But they would, wouldn’t they?
I think I have this right.
Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.
0 comments:
Post a Comment