“We Wail, Whether or
Not Anyone is Listening”
Here’s
a joke for you from the Tanakh. It starts, like most jokes do, with God just
walking around and thinking about things, and as God reflects God decides,
“There’s this city on Earth that has really got me POed. They’ve insulted me by
refusing to show mercy and hospitality, the few things I’ve told people to do,
and I’ve just got to set an example. I’m gonna blow this city, smack it down
into the soil, rub my hand around until there’s no trace of anything or anyone
left. That’ll show the rest of them: Don’t screw with me.”
Naturally,
God being God, God can’t just do this but has to tell someone first. There’s
this guy nearby God’s been having occasional conversations with and tells him,
“Hey, there’s this city over there and the populace have gotten on my nerves.
I’m going to rub them out, literally. Just wanted you to know.”
Now this guy, he’s
been paying attention to what God’s told him and how God’s behaved in the past
and, ignoring the question whether the city actually is wicked or not, says,
“Listen, I don’t want to tell you your business, but what kind of god punishes
the righteous with the wicked? What if
there are fifty good people in that city?
Would you ignore the city’s slights for fifty good people?” God allows as he would. Guy says, “Oh, but it could be some of them
woke up in a bad mood this morning, didn’t have their coffee. How about forty-five?” God agrees and guy says, “I wouldn’t presume
to tell you what righteousness is but what if some of those good people are
having a hard time and I can only locate forty.
Will you accept forty?” God says,
“Okay, forty works for me.”
This guy, he’s on
a roll, he says, “Hey, forty people that’s a lot of people, and it’s not like
you’re gonna give me forever to find them. And maybe they aren’t feeling so
righteous when I find them, y’know, kid’s got failing grades, wife burned the
manna. How’s thirty?” God, who by this time is thinking actually destroying a
whole city, that’s a big, time-consuming, difficult process, we’re talking
environmental impact statements, hazardous waste material, agrees. “Sure,
thirty’s fine. I like thirty.” But this guy, God may have made people, but this
guy knows people, he says, “Oh, hey, now I think about it, it’s nearly harvest,
most of the good people, they aren’t gonna be in city limits, they’re gonna be
out in the fields harvesting, reaping, bringing in the sheaves, the whole lot.
So maybe twenty is a better number.” By now, God’s not really paying attention,
playing a couple hands of solitaire.
“Yeah, no problem, twenty.”
But this guy, he
says, “I got it! Listen, what you want is a minyon. Ten righteous people. I
find ten righteous, good-hearted people, you’ll ignore what this city’s done?”
God’s got the guy on hold by this point, talking with other cultures, God puts
him back on, says finally, “Look, you get me ten righteous, just people in that
city, I’ll be such a sweet God, hosannas left and right, you won’t even know
me. Their grandchildren will be drinking milk and honey straight from the
bottle. Ten is my final offer.”
Of course, if
you’ve recognized that the guy I’m talking about is Abraham and the city is
Gomorrah of “Sodom and” fame, then you know the punchline is a killer. Abraham
can’t even find ten just people and God obliterates Gomorrah and in the process
we get Lot and his daughters repopulating the plateau, a pillar of salt, and a
whole bunch of stuff we’d rather not get into.
Now keep in mind,
a lot of writing at this time, it’s got to do double, triple duty, so jokes are
going to have a cautionary air to them too as well as parting some kind of
metaphysical truth. Here’s another knee-slapper from the Older Testament with
which you may also be familiar. There were these two, well, for want of a
better term, let’s call them “beings,” God and the Adversary, arguing about a
guy who is very devout, name of Job. God’s boasting of Job’s fealty and the
Adversary calls God on it, saying, “Of course he worships you. You give him
everything. He’s got land, family, prosperity, a secure future. Without that
he’d drop a dime on you before you could blink.” God says, “You wanna bet?” So
the Adversary removes all those benefits: he kills Job’s family, his crops
fail, his livestock develops brucellosis, his slaves run away, creditors take
away all his savings, and Job himself gets boils, pustules all over his body.
There’s a lot more
to the story, of course, and it’s a good story. But I want to focus on what
happens next. Three of Job’s friends, hearing of his misfortunes, his misery,
go to visit him. In the story you may remember, after Job himself breaks his
silence, they presume to lecture him on what he may or may not have done to
anger God.
But an incredible
and often overlooked event happens first. These three friends, when they see
Job, can barely recognize him, he’s so changed. The Job writer relates that, on
recognizing him, “they
raised their voices and wept aloud; they tore their robes and threw dust in the
air upon their heads. 13 They sat with him on the ground seven days
and seven nights, and no one spoke a word to him, for they saw that his
suffering was very great.”
They wail. They
tear their clothes. They comingle the dust of the earth with their flesh and
hair, perhaps reminding themselves of the state they will eventually return to.
And they sit on the ground with their friend for as long as he does. Quietly.
Respectfully. Silently. They treat his punishment, which the Job writer tells
us is what they think it to be, as their own. They take on the worst their
friend has suffered as if they had suffered it. Not in an intellectual way.
They shred their own clothing and get into the dust with him to suffer with
him.
Job and his
friends cry out after those seven days and God, miracle of miracles, responds.
But our experience, when everything we have worked for, bled for, some of us
have died for, crashes around us and we call out for God, our experience is
likelier to be similar to the Psalmist’s, who begins the famous lament of Psalm
22, “My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?” We wail at the injustice of it
all and there is no answer. No response. There is, at best, silence from the heavens
or the depths of our souls or wherever we may be seeking an answer. We wail,
and we receive a suggestion that no one is listening.
Where is God?
Where is justice?
We fetishize
justice in this country, even dressing it up as a woman holding scales and a
sword and wearing a blindfold, the suggestion being that she makes no
distinction between the people who come to her for judgement. And that’s a
wonderful ideal. We know it’s not what happens. We know that too often the
blindfold faces one way for one person and another for another person. We know
that in this country there are certain crimes for which you won’t be stopped or
arrested if you’re white. We know that in this country if you’re wealthy you
can afford a lawyer who will help you avoid punishment for whatever crime you
have committed. We know that in this country if you’re rich enough, your crime
isn’t even called a crime, but a downturn in the market.
Where is God?
Where is justice?
Scholar Mel Leaman
reminds us that “lament doesn’t guarantee God’s benevolent response,” but what
if there is nothing in response? No storm, no earthquake, no mighty wind or
even soft whisper. There is nothing. We look on the works in the first month of
this presidential administration and, noting the breaking up of families, the
fear in the eyes of people who may be next, we ask, Where is justice? Where is
God? In response, nothing.
How do we
interpret the absence of God when we seek justice?
The first thing we
must do is to determine for ourselves what it is that we want. When we march in
the streets or letters we call out for change and justice, but what is it we
want? If it’s true, as Martin Luther King, Jr, asserted that the arc of the
moral universe bends toward justice, what is it we mean by justice? And by “we”
I mean us, the people of here and now, this generation of American citizens and
people who would be citizens and people who want justice to roll on like a
river and righteousness like a never-ending stream. What do we want when we say
we want justice? Do we want a return to something good, like the previous
administration, which had flaws but we felt someone somewhere listened to us,
we felt our leader understood that people demand justice, understood which way the
blindfold faced, and what it took to secure our national character? Or do we
want something better, a land of milk and honey, a place in the sun, a world
where we are judged not by the color of our skin but the content of our
character?
As Naim Stifan
Ateek, a Palestinian Christian, reminds us, “Power is very closely linked with
justice, so much so that the one may be easily confused with the other. This is
illustrated daily by the frequent claims of the powerful…that their power is
justly gained and used to support justice.” It’s true that the current
presidential administration won enough electoral votes to put Donald Trump into
office. But a month on we find that win is simply not enough. How often do we
hear his boast that it was a record electoral victory, that the opposition may
have had millions more popular votes, but that’s because those votes were cast
by “illegals,” that the number of people at his Inauguration was exponentially
higher than the number of spectators at Barak Obama’s Inauguration or the
number of people who came out the day after to take part in the Women’s March?
These specious claims are easily refuted and have been multiple times, but he
continues to insist on them because power must not only be legitimate, power
must somehow be more popular than the opposition. This is what lends it the
pretense to justice.
Hannah Arendt,
whose Eichmann in Jerusalem will be
on bookshelves and nightstands for the next four years, reminds us that what
she called the banality of evil lies in its actions are uniformly “a textbook
case of bad faith, of lying self-deception combined with outrageous
stupidity…[as well as] the case of the eternally unrepentant criminal…who
cannot afford to face reality because his crime has become part and parcel of
it…”
Justice, like the
famous explanation of pornography by Justice Potter Stewart, is something that,
even if we can’t define it, we know when we see it. It is something too, I think, we recognize
best by its absence. Like oxygen, we
might appreciate it best when we don’t have it.
So what is it we
want when we say we want justice? I don’t know. Isn’t that lame, I give you the
question, I tell you it’s important, it’s what we have to answer first, and I
don’t have an answer. Do we want a return or something new? Maybe that’s
something for the We generation I mentioned earlier to determine. But I do have
a suggestion for what we do in the absence of an answer.
We wail. We wail,
whether or not anyone is listening.
Professor Leaman
reminds us, too, that “God’s people frequently forget how to live like God’s
children.” Like any children, God’s children need occasional reminding that
there is a better world that they’re growing up into and they had better get
their business straight if they want a better world for everyone. The
difference between a Noah and an Abraham, for instance, is that Noah, for all
his strengths, accepted God’s determination to destroy humanity. Not once, in
the story we have of him, is it suggested he maybe tried to get God to save
another family besides his own. He was, in contemporary terms, the perfect
right-leaning scold: The rest of you will drown but me and mine will get by.
Abraham, like Job,
argued with God and he did so not for himself or his family. He has no kin
we’re told of in Gomorrah. On behalf of a comparative handful of people he
called for justice. He told God, You are punishing an entire community for the
misdeeds of a few people and that is simply not right. It is not just.
Do we dare, like
Abraham, to get angry at God? For God’s silence? For God’s inattention? You
don’t get angry with someone you don’t care about. You ignore her, you avoid
her, you cut her out of your life. But anger suggests you want something in
that person to change. Dutch psychologist Nico Frijda reminds us, “Anger
implies hope and that fighting is meaningful.”
Now I’m not
talking just pissed-off, fly off the handle, how could you leave the water
running for three hours kind of anger. That is just uncontrolled egotism, the
kind that makes you sit up at three in the morning tweeting your fury at an
otherwise resting world. I’m talking about righteous anger, the kind that hits
you like a slap, that challenges you to think not only of yourself but of
others. It is, like Abraham, to challenge God of behalf of creation, to remind power
of its better self, and that if it can’t reconcile its actions with that better
self, then it had better step down.
Too often, the one
is mistaken for the other. How many times have you been told, Get over it. Your
candidate lost, accept it. Give him a chance, will you. The way you feel now is
the way we felt for eight years.
We aren’t
lamenting the loss of our team in the playoffs, no matter how close the score,
no matter how exciting the overtime. What we are lamenting is the codification
of prejudice against our neighbors, a barring of our cousins, our lovers, even
of ourselves, as if who we are, who we love, what we believe, where we come
from, somehow lessens this society, this country we love.
We must get down
in the ashes and dust with them, our cousins, our lovers, our neighbors. Maybe
literally. We must join them and wail at the injustice they suffer. Our wail
and our witness are our most powerful weapons. “Even in the absence of God,
silence cannot be our last word.” As always, “We are the people we have been
waiting for.” Abraham and Job stood before the Almighty and demanded an
explanation. Can we do any less against this administration?
No comments:
Post a Comment