What Did Jesus Do?

A column by Michael Gerson in the August 5, 2011 issue of the Washington Post titled "What Would Jesus Cut," raises a question that, in my opinion, needs serious thought. As Gerson explains, "With varied motivations, human beings tend to invoke the name of God in foxholes, in the throes of passion and in budget debates." And as he further notes, at least in terms of the budget debate, depending on which outcome is favored God seems to adjust the answer to fit that preference.

I have often heard it lamented that if only the Apostle Paul or Jesus were personally present we could be assued of the "right" answere to our problems. But interestingly when Jesus was present in the flesh and questions were brought to him, the answers he gave were often not satisfactory to the questioner. Sometimes he simply replied with another question, eg. "whose name and inscription is on the coin you hold?" Sometimes he gave a stunning answer that shook the questioner so badly he could only turn away in disbelief. And we wish Jesus were here so we could ask him in person....?

It is human to wish for the quick, easy answer to our perplexing problems. Being follower of Jesus is not intended to be a walk on the beach. But we would nuch rather have it handed to us in four easy steps. Spin the bible and the right verse floats to the top, obvious in its meaning and easy to apply.

So if by asking "what would Jesus do," we are hoping for affirmation for our own inclination or a simple rule to solve our problems we are asking in vain. The question would much better be aked, "What did Jesus do?" Stated that way we are better able to let the text speak for itself rather than assume that we know what Jesus would do were he in the situation we find ourselves.

But there is even a prior, crucial question that needs to be asked and which Jesus answered very early. That question is "Who is your God?" At twelve when Jesus was found in the temple he explained that he needed to be about his father's business. Later following his baptism he clarified to the tempter that he totally committed to the Heavenly Father and was taking orders only from God. It is in that context that he can discern the right choice even though it cut across every instinct he might have as a human being. Unless we, as well as the nation's politicians, have answered that question, we can ask "What would Jesus do?" until the cows come home and only come up with the answer that best benefits our own interests.

"A Man of Property"

One reason the old literary masters are masters is because their works are timeless. Timeless in terms, not only of a gripping tale well told, but also of a relevance that speaks to the present time. Even though we consider our times unique in some way or another we can read a writer of a previous century and find a vivid description of our own .

Such a writer was John Galesworthy (1867-1933). Yes, I know. I should have become intimately acquainted with him years ago. I could blame the small print in my college English Lit text and the few lines it accorded this very significant author but that would be giving myself a pass I don't deserve. I even ignored the PBS series a few years ago that featured The Forsyt Saga which is some of Galesworthy's finest writing.

So now I make this wonderful discovery by way of A Man of Property, the first in the Saga series. I found in this novel characters that were drawn so well that I was drawn into their lives and experiences set in England just before the turn of the century. They too were struggling with shifting moral standards, changing tastes and economic values of a society in which they thought ought to be stable and fixed.

The title denotes the issue that shapes the plot. Property is the guiding principle of the Forsyt's. Not only in real estate but all that a "man" might own which included their women. How that right to property is maintained then becomes a pressing question since other forces are at work to loosen that almost death grip. That conflict is played out in a number of venues. In court rooms, in family gatherings, in husband/wife conversations or silences, in trustee meetings men and women struggle with the question, how can I cling to what I have or keep my place in this shifting scene?

The question of the human relationship to property still remains an urgent one. It is argued and fought out on some of the same stages. Recent studies of the happiness of the wealthy show that even those with the most need estimate that they need at least ten persent more to feel secure. While some of those with wealth have become notable philanthropists others have determined that poverty is not a concern of theirs and since they have made it, everyone else can too. The handling of money and property still creates strains and tensions between husbands and wives and scrambles families.

I am grateful to John Galesworthy for helping me see the universality of this issue so that perhaps I, who have relatively little, can recognize myself as a man of property.

Sing and Shout and Pray

A few days ago when it was announced that President Mubarak of Egypt was gone without a bloody fight it seemed almost too good to be true. Peaceful solutions don't happen anymore--not in this world of terrorist attacks, ethnic cleansing, drug wars and decade-long wars. And especially not in a country where 90% or more of the population is of Muslim faith. There are those who tell us that all those people are violent, hateful and believe in nothing but "holy war." When lo and behold the dictator who had the police and the miliatary at his beck and call left the country with barely a shot being fired.

What was the secret to this astonishing turn of events when it had all the components of a bloody uprising? I know only what the media shared but I would gather this much. This multitude of thousands shouted and chanted slogans. They sang. And they prayed. The overhead pictures revealed hundreds and hundreds of people kneeling in orderly rows praying. They had also gathered stones--piles of them. But there were few targets.

There was that brief time when the hired thugs came charging through the throngs on horses and camels. There was resistance but in the huge crowd of people even horses and camels had no place to go, and badly outnumbered they soon turned tail.

Day after day, night after night the people were there. they listened to the hollow, vain promises of the dictator but would not be dissuaded. There they were, their voices worn to a whisper and yet they shouted and sing and prayed.

It echoed of a multitude marching around the walls of Jericho blowing tumpets and with a shout crumbling those impregnable walls. I was made to think of a desperate throng caught between sea and army listening to those strange words, "Stand still and see the salvation of God."

I can't say that the Egyptian revolution equals a biblical account of God's deliverance but it is aboundantly clear that if God works through world events God has writ large that it doesn't take AK 47s or bombs to bring about the change the oppressed long for. That just doesn't compute in this country that was birthed in a bloody conflict and has placed its faith firmly in weapons even those of mass destruction. Again and again in an effort to influence the course of events the first course taken is to export weapons. So we arm the world as well as ourselves ever becoming more fearful and insecure while a country of oppressed people shouts and sings and prays and gains their goal.

The Best of Old Friends

For a month I have been plowing through Solzhenitsyn's November 1916. His dense style makes finishing a test of self-discipline since it goes on for a thousand pages. On the plus side I am learning a great deal about the people of Russia as the commoners are described during World War I and the lead up to the Communist Revolution.

But as I waded doggedly ahead I came across a couple sentences that made me pause and reflect. "One thing's for sure, no matter how many marvelous people you meet later on, there's no one like the friend of your youth. No one else will ever be so close. If only because there's no one else with whom you can relieve your past in such detail. Your friend knows all about it, has shared it..."

With even brief reflection I have to say Solzhenitsyn has really nailed it for me. Immediately to mind come images of ten or twelve people who fit that category. And I find that the farther back we go the more significant they become. The very earliest through adolescent years somehow have a claim on my friendship that is beyond my explanation. It must be that together we experienced some of those earliest life-shaping experiences that will never be shared with anyone else. They alone know what it was like to be there, to see, to hear, to feel, to smell what will forever be indelibly imprinted on our minds and personalities. We each expereinced the same, but differently so the events have different meanings for each but we each remember and it is ours.

I shared the "church" experience with one adolescent/teen friend. While we had very different family experiences and eventually different life goals we shared much in the social realm. We played sports together and dated girls together. I think we admired each other for our different strengths and challenged each other to succeed.

One warm Sunday evening we either had no dates or took them home early. We drove toether to my house and instead of just stopping to let me off, he quickly turned off the lights and turned off the moter. For several long minutes we sat in silence listening to the crickets. Both of us were feeling we were in the vicinity of a crossroads. We scarecly knew how to say our thoughts. But eventually we got to the question, "Is this all there is?" And each of us rolled that question around as we thought as deeply as we knew how about the direction of life and what were our options.

His conclusion was different from mine in that months later he would say my course is set while I said there is a different way I must take. But our different choices were being made together and that gives our relationship a different quality. We shared a quiet hour when we were being "real" together, dealing with crucial issues in our "real" amateur way. That makes my friend special and one I will treasure always. The author is exactly right, "...there's no one like the friend of your youth."

A Nation of Nuts

Instead of wondering about the state of the union, Courtland Milloy, in a recent column in the Washington Post, (January 26, 2011) questions the nation's state of mind. He concludes that "we are one nutty nation." Of course some of us have suspected that for some time but Milloy gives us hard evidence that removes all doubt. In spite of the nations boasted education system and the claim that we are enlightened, practical people, recent trends would draw another conclusion.


He points out that the economic system is, as he says, "wacky" in that high unemplyment is good for the stock market, layoffs bring big bonuses for CEOs and tax cuts for the wealthy promise to produce jobs. What right-thinking people would construct that sort of system?

Then there are the ones who squeek through the recession managing to hang on to their houses now complaining that they are the victims of "frugality fatigue." That is assuaged with the purchase of 51-inch TVs. But if that fails to restore their souls there is the possibiltiyt of finding solace in getting high on bath salts. The only down side to that remedy is that it randomly prompts people to do such things as taking knives to slit their skin. But with a little creativity one can find other chemicals that provide equally unpredictable effects.

Milloy ticks off additional ways we have found to relieve our fears as well as self-destruct. Pills by the ton, booze by the gallon, heroin from liberated Afghanistan, cocain friendly South America, weed by the bale from Mexico. And wonder of wonders, "Starbucks is coming out with bucket-size cups of caffeine" to get us out of bed.

One might think the nation would now be coping with all its woes with joy and confidence. Instead the National Institute of Mental Health provides a list of common illnesses that afflict growing numbers. Among them are "generalized anxiety disorder," "anti'social personality disorder" and "poor behavioral controls." You can add to that "panic disorder" and you begin to understand why there are 300 million firearms in the hands of fearful citizens.

I would echo the closing lament of Milloy in this plaintive question: "How strong can the state of the union really be if our minds are so unsound?"

Reading the Constitution

It's big news just now that the United States House of Representatives has read the US Constitution, outloud, in public. Not a bad idea. If our representatives are to rule constitutionally they ought to know what the constitution says. It might also be observed that they ought to know what it says to even be elected.

So now they know. But knowing, alas, hardly equals doing. Right off the bat they conveniently omited one or two ammendments which they considered unworthy of notice. Further the Constitution is always subject to interpretation which means that conclusions on any issue will not be unanimous. The Supreme Court regularly divides four to five on cases brought before it. One group of law makers will advocate one law as best for the country and then accuse the disenters of being unconstitutional.

I find that there are similar attitudes toward the Constitution as there are toward the Scriptures. According to some they hold the former in such high esteem as to be as holy as the latter. They give the Constitutions framers a special relationship with God that gives their work an infaliable aura and what they intended an eternal value.

In spite of the supposed high esteem for each document both become a pretzel to be twisted into what ever shape the reader finds advantageous. For a time some defenders of the Ten Commandments worked mightly to have them cast in bronze and posted on Court House walls and in schools. For all the seeming reverance attributed to that word from the Lord, law makers as well as their constiuents went right on cheating on their wives, visiting prostitutes, taking bribes, lying, and flaunting the law, apologizing only after being caught.

What are we to expect from those who announce their loyalty to the Constitution when they play fast and loose with the Scriptures. It is clear that for the majority their decisions will be guided by whatever seems to be to their political advantage rather than a moral conviction that is formed either by a secular document or Divine revelation.