Then He lifted up His eyes toward His disciples, and said: “Blessed are you poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. Blessed are you who hunger now, for you shall be filled. Blessed are you who weep now, for you shall laugh. Blessed are you when men hate you, and when they exclude you, and revile you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of Man’s sake. Rejoice in that day and leap for joy! For indeed your reward is great in heaven, for in like manner their fathers did to the prophets. But woe to you who are rich, for you have received your consolation. Woe to you who are full, for you shall hunger. Woe to you who laugh now, for you shall mourn and weep. Woe to you when all men speak well of you, for so did their fathers to the false prophets” (Luke 6:20-26).
I read an interesting article in the National Catholic Reporter recently entitled “Priceless blessedness” in which the author, Sister Mary McGlone, examines Luke’s presentation of the Beatitudes. Rather than getting a clear exposition of the teaching of Jesus, however, I was subjected to the Higher Critical twisting of scripture, in the name of advancing the Social Gospel – which is really no Gospel at all. Sister McGlone’s main point was simple: To shame rich, privileged Americans into committing themselves to social and political reform, rather than to call all people to repentance and faith in Christ Jesus for the forgiveness of their sins.
When other’s suffering leads people to work for change, they begin to belong to the category of those who will be hated, excluded, insulted and denounced on account of the Son of Man. No one effectively calls for conversion or protests injustice without paying the cost. But their activity buys them a place among that mysterious group of God’s blessed ones whose hopes are shaped by the needs of their most vulnerable brothers and sisters.[1]
Sister McGlone focuses on Jesus’ statement, “Woe to those who are rich, for you have received your consolation.”[2] Sister McGlone writes that we should not “quibble and wiggle with phrases like ‘poverty of spirit,’ we need to face Luke’s presentation of the Beatitudes as it is.”[3] I agree, but this is not what she does. In fact, we should assume that all of scripture means what it says according to the plain reading of the text, always following the three rules of Biblical interpretation: 1) read the passage in context, 2) don’t ignore the context of the passages, and 3) don’t read passages out of their original context. Unfortunately, that means there must be some quibbling. Despite the fact that she even seems to recognize that “poor” in the context of Luke 6:20 isn’t referring simply to worldly poverty, writing, “…we know that there is nothing virtuous about destitution or malnutrition…”[4] this does not impact her interpretation. Sister McGlone wants to use this passage to call people to Social Justice, and focuses on the contrast Jesus seems to be making between the virtuous, noble poor, and the evil rich.
It is easy to use scripture to make it seem like being rich is sinful in and of itself. Jesus does, after all, tell us that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.[5] The Apostles marvel at what Jesus says; if it is impossible for a rich man to be saved, how could the poor have any hope? In the socially and economically unequal society of first century Rome, the Apostles couldn’t conceive that someone who was rich wasn’t blessed by God. Good things, like wealth and prosperity, happen to good people whom God loves; bad things, like poverty and illness, happen to bad people whom God hates. That is how sinful man understands the workings of God. If I work hard enough, I can please God, and He will give me the desires of my heart.
But is Jesus really telling us that it is sinful to be rich? Not hardly. As much as Sister McGlone does not want us to, we must consider not only Luke 6:24, but also other passages which inform what Jesus is teaching here, and we must read those plainly and in their context as well.
In Luke 12:13-21, Jesus is approached by a man who was having a dispute with his brother over money. They were specifically fighting over their inheritance from their father. The one brother who approaches Jesus thinks he can use Jesus to get his share out of his brother. Jesus responds by telling the man a parable:
Then He spoke a parable to them, saying: “The ground of a certain rich man yielded plentifully. And he thought within himself, saying, ‘What shall I do, since I have no room to store my crops?’ So he said, ‘I will do this: I will pull down my barns and build greater, and there I will store all my crops and my goods. And I will say to my soul, “Soul, you have many goods laid up for many years; take your ease; eat, drink, and be merry.”’ But God said to him, ‘Fool! This night your soul will be required of you; then whose will those things be which you have provided?’ “So is he who lays up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God.”[6]
The whole point of this parable is pretty obvious. Jesus is quite clear that it isn’t a rich man’s wealth, in and of itself, that is evil and makes the rich man sinful. It is covetousness. Jesus sets up this parable, known as the Parable of the Rich Fool, saying: Take heed and beware of covetousness, for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of the things he possesses.[7] So, when Jesus warns the rich, He is warning the rich to repent of their sin and have faith in Him for the forgiveness of their sins. This was the same message He brought to the tax collectors and sinners with whom He ate at Matthew’s house. The rich man in the parable was concerned with laying up treasure for himself on earth. He was not rich toward God. He made an idol of his wealth. He did not fear, love, and trust in God above all things. Sister McGlone is right when she says we ought to cringe when we hear Jesus tell the rich that they have received their consolation.[8] For if we fear, love, and trust in our wealth and possessions rather than God through faith in Christ Jesus, we to will have received our consolation while here on earth. St. Paul teaches the same thing when he writes to Timothy:
Now godliness with contentment is great gain. For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out. And having food and clothing, with these we shall be content. But those who desire to be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and harmful lusts which drown men in destruction and perdition. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, for which some have strayed from the faith in their greediness, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.[9]
The problem with taking the text at face value, however, is that one cannot then easily use the text to advance the cause of social justice. The Social Gospel movement was a social reform movement that developed and took hold in American Christianity in the early part of the 20th Century.[10] This movement goes hand-in-hand with a method of biblical interpretation that developed in the 19th Century called Higher Criticism.[11] Higher Criticism in it’s most neutral incarnation, examines scriptural writings like witnesses in a court of law. Higher Critics evaluate scripture rationally; they subject God’s Word to their reason, rather than the other way around. This is contrary to the Historical-Grammatical method, which takes the text at face value. Higher Critics treat scripture as any other human writings; they are not inerrant, but subject to human failings. Higher criticism gives the individual interpreter, not Holy Scripture, ultimate authority. This is incompatible with the Sola Scriptura principle of Lutheranism. Higher Critics look at the Gospel of St. Luke and treat it as though the things Luke wrote were his own message, rather than the word of God. Higher Criticism discounts the miraculous. So, when the gospels record Jesus performing a miracle, like the feeding of the 5,000 for instance, they try to explain it rationally, rather than taking the text for what it says. Jesus didn’t miraculously feed 5,000 people with five loaves and two fishes because He is God in human flesh. Rather, Jesus’ teaching moved people to share food with their neighbors that they had been selfishly hiding away for themselves. Examined in this way, scripture can be allegorized and used teach whatever point a given theologian wants to make.
As a result, Higher Criticism turns scripture into, at best, a collection of morality tales to inspire people to act better; at worst, it turns scripture into a tool to advance heresy, obscure Christ, and scratch the itching ears of sinners who will not put up with sound teaching.
The Beatitudes are often understood as a quid pro quo. If you are poor in spirit, the kingdom of heaven is yours, so work really hard to be as poor in spirit as you can. If you do this, then you get that; or this thing will happen to you. Jesus, however, is not declaring here an ethical demand of his followers by laying out a law of behavior or attitude. The Beatitudes are not so much a mountain of law which one is to climb to be a better Christian, or to qualify for blessing and eternal life, but rather it can be seen – particularly by your “old” man – as a mountain of law under which one is to be totally crushed. The Beatitudes are also gospel. They assure Jesus’ disciples of the future blessings in store for them, blessing which, in fact, already belong to us through our faith in Jesus. The new man hears in the Beatitudes assurance of God’s goodness and future blessing; the old man hears law and judgment. When we recognize our own spiritual poverty, when the Lord leads us to hunger and thirst for God’s righteousness, when He makes us pure in heart so that we seek to worship only the true God, then we are blessed, now and forever.[12] The good works that Sister McGlone says will buy us a place among God’s blessed ones are not currency with which we purchase blessings from God. They are the fruits of our faith that we produce in the way an apple tree produces it’s fruit. For we are God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.[13] To view the Beatitudes as a prescription for our behavior so that we can gain blessing from God, and therefore be a good Christian, is to put the cart before the horse. Our good works are a product of our faith.
[1] McGlone, Mary M. "Priceless Blessedness." The National Catholic Reporter, February 8, 2019. Accessed February 8, 2019. Kindle Edition
[2] Luke 6:24
[3] McGlone, Mary M. "Priceless Blessedness." The National Catholic Reporter, February 8, 2019. Accessed February 8, 2019. Kindle Edition
[4] ibid.
[5] Matthew 19:24
[6] Luke 12:16-21
[7] Luke 12:15
[8] McGlone, Mary M. "Priceless Blessedness." The National Catholic Reporter, February 8, 2019. Accessed February 8, 2019. Kindle Edition
[9] 1 Timothy 6:6-10
[10] Stevens, Mark A., ed. Merriam-Websters Collegiate Encyclopedia. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, 2000.
[11] Mirriam Webster defines Higher Criticism as the study of biblical writings to determine their literary history and the purpose and meaning of the authors. This assumes that the man, rather than God is the author. This is in contrast to what was known in the 19th Century as Lower Criticism, which is concerned with the recovery of original texts especially of Scripture through collation of extant manuscripts.
[12] Engelbrecht, Rev. Edward A., ed. The Lutheran Study Bible. Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2009.
[13] Ephesians 2:10
No comments:
Post a Comment