Creative Team Building and Leadership Resources - In our Elements

Mysteries of Obedience

Tuesday, September 4th, 2012

Fellow Passengers: This week’s Promise Passage* (I Samuel 15) transports me to the Church of Corpus Christi, a Roman Catholic parish between Broadway and Amsterdam Avenues in the Morningside Heights section of Manhatten. It is the church where a Columbia University student, later to become the distinguished Trappist monk and author Thomas Merton, was baptized and first received Holy Communion in 1938. Just a few months earlier, another celebrated writer of a different ilk, George Carlin, was born and received the rite of baptism in the same church font by the same priest. It’s too bad Merton didn’t stick around the city long enough to hear the teenage George Carlin torture the priest with his comically contrived questions around what he called the “heavy mysteries.” I remember hearing Carlin describe these antics on his famous Class Clown album. He and his friends would spend all week thinking up trick questions for the priest. They might take a simple sin and surround it with bizarre circumstances, like the one involving the command to take communion at least once during the Easter season, between Ash Wednesday and Pentecost Sunday. Hey Father, Carlin would begin. Suppose that you didn’t make your Easter duty, and it’s Pentecost Sunday, the last day, and you’re on a ship at sea, and the chaplain goes into a coma, but you wanted to receive. And then it’s Monday, too late. but then you cross the International Date Line. . . Or my favorite, Hey, hey, hey Father! Hey, uh, if God is all-powerful, can he make a rock so big that he himself can’t lift it?

I imagine George Carlin and his buddies had a hey day when their church school took them through the early history of Israel, and they ran across passages like this one in I Samuel, where Saul is rejected as King. Here’s poor old Saul, destined for tragedy because he fulfills the people’s wish to be like other nations, which is in itself a rejection of God’s direct leadership. And the newly crowned King gets his first call on the red phone – the direct line from God, and hears the command: Go wipe out all the Amalekites. All of them. Don’t spare a soul. They asked for it. Saul and his military go to work, and nearly complete the genocide order. Nearly is the operative word. They spared the Amalekite King; who knows why? And the soldiers took a bit of plunder, a few fatted calves and some sheep. So the prophet, who also has a direct line on the red phone, hears of it and calls in Saul to let him know the consequences of his failure to follow orders. He’s lost the crown. Saul tries to justify the looting with a lame excuse that it was brought back for a burnt offering to the Lord. Samuel soundly rejects this rationalization with the famous retort: Does the Lord delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices as much as in obeying the Lord? To obey is better than sacrifice, and to heed is better than the fat of rams. Here’s where George Carlin’s heavy mystery questioning connects: According to the Levitical law, from the first chapter we see that the Lord does indeed delight in burnt offerings and sacrifice, and is very specific in the commands of how to perform these sacrifices. So what does the prophet mean, to obey is better than sacrifice, when sacrifice is part and parcel of obedience? It sounds a lot like God creating a rock so big he himself can’t lift. And we haven’t even gotten around to God’s law, Thou shalt not kill, a plain and clear command with no qualifier, which is difficult to obey if you hear another command to go and commit genocide (forget trying to justify it with arguments about self-defense and just war theory; we’re talking wholesale slaughter of every man, woman, and child).

Given that we won’t be able to untangle these heavy mysteries any better than the Corpus Christi priest, let it suffice to illustrate a basic challenge in biblical ethics. Obedience to some precepts trumps obedience to other precepts. Some levitical mandates are superior to others. Love thy neighbor as thyself, for example, seems to be on a higher plane than dietary and sexuality restrictions (after all, not eating shrimp and not touching your wife during menstruation don’t make it into the verses of Trust and Obey).  In the end, according to Thomas Merton, the challenge behind sorting through the heavy mysteries of ethical contradictions is to be who God created us to be. He wrote in New Seeds of Contemplation that A tree gives glory to God by being a tree. For in being what God means it to be, it is obeying Him. It “consents,” so to speak, to His creative love. It is expressing an idea which is in God and which is not distinct from the essence of God, and therefore a tree imitates God by being a tree. That makes good sense, if we are talking about being a tree, or being a faithful monk, as Merton was, or being a funny stand-up comic, as Carlin was. It ceases to make sense when we are talking about being a soldier following genocidal orders.

How about you? Where does this Promise Passage take you on your journey of faith? Feel free to comment, and share with friends on Facebook, Google+, Twitter, email, etc.

Share/Save

Comments

  • September 4, 2012 at 7:28 pm

    What are you talking about? I sometimes wonder what your point is in these topics. Saul did not obey the command, and what is even more distressing is your continual questioning of scripture. As if God needs your explanations to help Him explain or explain away what the bible says. Just stick to scripture, not your misinterpretation of it.

    Comment by jim munsey

  • September 5, 2012 at 7:37 am

    You are right on again, Stan. Like Jesus, you have great insights and interpretations of the scriptures.
    This brings me to the bumper sticker by Linda K. Williams, First Church of the Brethren, San Diego, CA–”When Jesus said, ‘Love your enemies,’ I think he probably meant don’t kill them.”

    Comment by Janet Davies

  • September 5, 2012 at 10:14 am

    Jesus is God janet. same God in o.t. as in n.t. I don’t know why that is so hard to comprehend. He is God and you or I are not Him.

    Comment by jim munsey

  • September 5, 2012 at 12:53 pm

    Jim, you make me smile. I’m so glad you’re still reading the posts. I won’t insult your intelligence by explaining the “point” of this post; it is obvious enough, if you’ll just read it again. Which scripture are you wanting to stick to, by the way, in reference to today’s story? The commandment, “Thou shalt not kill?” Or the commandment, “Go and kill every person, man, woman, and child?” The commandment to offer burnt offering sacrifices, or the commandment to obey rather than sacrifice? Just wondering.

    Comment by Stan Dotson

  • September 5, 2012 at 4:50 pm

    how bout reading the text and staying with it as the prophet tells Saul. There is no contradiction there.

    Comment by jim

  • September 5, 2012 at 7:44 pm

    ok, Jim, I’ll do that. Here’s what the prophet said to Saul: “The Lord Almighty says: ‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’” No problem, unless the community you are leading is a covenant community, and a key precept/ commandment of that covenant is “thou shalt not kill.” I’m going to assume that if a prophet you trusted came to you, Jim, telling you that God wanted you to go on a killing spree, including killing infants, that you’d disobey that instruction. You see, we can’t read a single text of scripture in isolation from the rest of scripture. Which is what complicates our ethics, as we juggle competing claims for obedience.

    Comment by Stan Dotson

  • September 5, 2012 at 8:49 pm

    Is God the same God of the o.t. and n.t. or not?

    Comment by jim

  • September 5, 2012 at 9:02 pm

    Stan,
    Thanks for this. It transported me to my 6 years at Union Seminary in New York. When one exited the front door, you could see the church of St. Thomas and St. George you reference.

    Jim, it’d be cool to have you answer your own question you posted at 8:49 P.M., with your scriptural and ethical reasons for your response. In other words, what is at stake for you in your question? I could not tell what you perceived was missing in the conversation.

    Thanks

    Comment by Marc Mullinax

  • September 5, 2012 at 9:06 pm

    yes

    Comment by jim

  • September 5, 2012 at 9:21 pm

    It amazes me sometimes that I am even having to address these subjects, what did the prophet say to do and do you think that was God’s orders or not?

    Comment by jim

  • September 6, 2012 at 2:04 pm

    Jim, there is only one God, always has been, always will be. No difference in God between the Testaments. The difference throughout the Bible is one of theology, of the varying perceptions of the image of God seen throughout scripture. Remember, the Bible was inspired by God but written by humans, with distinctly human viewpoints of who God is. It is not the book of Mormon, dropped out of heaven on golden tablets written by the finger of God. So we have various communities of faith throughout the history of the Bible and beyond, seeing God from differing, oftentimes competing, angles. It’s why we can have one viewpoint hearing God say, “Thou shalt not kill” (presumably this was written on stone by the finger of God), and we have another viewpoint speaking for God, saying, “Thou shalt kill all the infants” of a particular city. It makes for an interesting and complicated task of deciphering biblical ethics. For Christians, one of the prevailing interpretations is that of progressive revelation, with the person of Christ being the fullest revelation of God, and so we look to Christ’s life and teaching to help us make decisions about which viewpoint of the Old Testament we will emphasize and make our own. Which is another reason why I don’t think the mandate kill everyone, men, women, children, and infants, hardly merits a place of honor in our system of ethics and decision-making. To answer your question, no, I don’t for a minute think this command was an order given by the God revealed in Jesus Christ, especially given what Christ said about the little ones.

    Comment by Stan Dotson

  • September 6, 2012 at 7:47 pm

    All scripture is God breathed and is profitable for doctrine for instruction in righteouness that the man of God may be throughly furnished.

    Comment by jim


to top